The public’s frustration with the American media andbeyond is building and what’s worse, are the Americans whogive credibility to media organizations because they are the“big” names in media — The New York Times and WashingtonPost are two examples.

The tabloid reporting coming from the “press” at thetop of the journalism spectrum is worrisome. It takes theprofession and twists it into something ugly and unethical.

Journalists are journalists because they have a penchantfor justice and truth, but as we are seeing today, those whocall themselves the “press” and report stories with informationfrom “anonymous sources” are not doing Americans aservice. And, that is what journalism is — a service. Newsstories are history’s “first draft” and if the first draft rests onair, we have a problem.

Most all of these “news” organizations have cried out,“Freedom of the Press,” but they are leaving a crucial partout — that freedom comes with a tremendous responsibilityand when a journalist meets this responsibility, it is a terrificfeeling of service.

On March 10, “LIBERTY The Press and the Presidency inthe Post-Truth Era” will be held at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Concerning are the players who will present:Human Rights Watch, the Washington Post and the OmahaWorld Herald.

All three of these organizations have reported falseinformation regarding the “wars” in the middle east. TheOmaha World Herald often regurgitates information fromthe Associated Press. Human Rights Watch calls for furthersanctions on Syria.

In the description of the seminar, the phrases, “AlternativeNews” and "Fake News” are mentioned. Perhaps the mostworrisome.

Since 2002, the United States has been at “war” in themiddle east. You know the drill. It started with the weaponsof mass destruction in Iraq and Saddam Hussein’s crueltytoward his people. Later, it was Gaddafi in Libya who wasthe murdering tyrant, then, President Assad of Syria, whowas gassing the Syrian people.

At some point, it became clear the WMD story rang weakand even the “big” media corporations reported the evidencewas falsified, however, they continued to relay the samerhetoric coming from Washington on Afghanistan, Libyaand Syria.

Washington continued to speak for Americans, asif we wanted “war,” as if we wanted our fellow Americansfighting in a desert overseas, going days without sleep andcoming home suicidal, and as if the reports on these foreignleaders were true.

The result is tens of thousands of innocent middle easternpeople and Americans died and not one word from themedia on the possibilities the “evidence” is thin. In fact, themedia began pushing more stories on how “bad” Assad is.

Independent journalists, the US Peace Council, Hands OffSyria and Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (who is now being demonized)have spoken out on ending the “regime change,” whichis a nice word for genocide, in Syria, and to the perpetual“war.” Gabbard also introduced a bill to stop American taxdollars from funding terrorism. Remember, these “wars” arecosting the United States billions every day.

Reading the “news” today is a tricky task, but it can bedone. Here are a few tips on how to determine if a newsstory is true:

1. A lot of sites and social media pages regurgitate newsfrom other sites, such as the New York Times. Some willcome right out and name the publication, others won’t. If thesource for the original story is named, go to that story.

2. Look for the quotes. Who said them? If they are unnamedor anonymous, the story is questionable. For example,a Washington Post story from last week, claimed theGOP was in disarray, according to “an anonymous sourcewho wanted to remain anonymous for future information”from the White House.

3. After the quotes are scanned, move on to reading thestory. Watch the language for dramatic words. Many reportsare sensationalized using language. Skip over these words toget the story. You may have to scrap it all together.

4. Read the story from beginning to end and then read itagain. If some of the details seem questionable, such as 7-year-old Bana tweeting full sentences in English from a warzone and using government buzzwords, like “No-Fly Zone,”the story is untrue.

5. Start picking the story apart. Verify against the originalsources, i.e., Olga Korbut was reported as selling her Olympicmedals. On her social media, however, she adamantlydenied it as hashtag fake news:

“OMG, Russian article said I sold medals because I’mbroke. Not true! Happy & Healthy in AZ. @nbc @tmz @abc@cbs #fakenews. I have a gr8 life.”

She was the source for this particular story.

On executive orders from the White House: Go straight tothe White House website and read them. If you don’t havethe media filter, you will be more informed.

6. Notice how you keep seeing the same story over andover, just on different sites or pages. After you’ve checkedthe story out, realize this: You are meant to see it over andover, i.e., the Clinton “nomination” and subsequent “win.”

7. Remember the underdog. We have independent journalistsin Syria and just because the Washington Post dismissestheir work, doesn’t mean they are not reporting the truth.Many underdog journalists are credible. In fact, we are luckythey don’t work for the Post or its counterparts.

8. Refrain from using “Snopes” as a tool to verify articles.Snopes has attempted to discredit the independent journalistsin Syria, even though the evidence from them carries moreweight than the reports from the American media.